Hello, I saw you assesed the Stateless (band) article from Stub class to Start class. I am aware of the criteria being used to asses certain articles, but I would like to know what in particular made you choose for Start class for this article. I actually want to know where I should work on harder or if I'm doing something wrong, or what is needed for this to be a better article. I read all the wikipedia guides and all, but you know, it's not always that easy. My only goal is to contribute to the article and try to only use verifiable sources and facts. I just need to know a little better how to improve this, to let's say a C-class article (1 step at the time!). Thanks! Hans (talk) 16:23, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

(in response to your answer on my talk) Ok, thanks alot. I'll try to add more content, and when their new album will be released I'm sure lots of new sources to cite will pop up. I'll try to add how they formed (found an article about that) and make a "musical style" section, which seems common for most band articles. And I'm thinking of asking a native English speaker to rewrite most of the text, my English is too average to really make this a better article. But I'll do my best the next couple of months and I'll ask for a new assessment when I think it might be ready for a C-class article. But having a good base structure and already having all the facts (verifiably) sourced is a good start for a better article, I believe. Thanks for your time! Hans (talk) 16:50, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Mr. Bradbury, I see that you have just done a major cleanup of the markup structures in the Neanderthal article. The Neanderthal article is the kind of article that I love to read in Wikipedia, and so I really appreciate your work. I have a question regarding the ordering of the References section citations. In all other wikipedia articles I have read (maybe 50), references (as opposed to notes) are sorted in alphabetical order. I find no rhyme or reason in the current References order in the article. What am I missing? (I am a new editor, and seeing that your work displays mastery of wikipedia rules and processes, I feel good about asking you.) Thanks in advance for your answer.Middle Fork (talk) 22:09, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Got your note, checked the Neanderthal article. Great!! Thanks. Had I been more secure, I would have done it myself when I first noticed the problem. I will be more bold in the future. By the way, I wish the initial editors had not embedded the vast majority of full references in the notes field. Makes it very difficult to quickly scan to make sure the key players in various sub-controversies are being recognized in the article. But when I made that suggestion, it was rejected by someone who, I felt, had developed uncomfortable "ownership" vibes.Middle Fork (talk) 04:33, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Well my (counted) 950 page book is the one given as 948: the 1989 edition. So everything's in order. I was just reading what had been done to the French Revolution today & am glad you do not make mistakes! Cordialement,Frania W. (talk) 00:22, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tom. Thank you for your assessment on the David Berkeley article and for the formatting of the reflist. If you have time, do you have any advice on how I could further improve the article? Thank you. McMarcoP (talk) 08:11, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Tom, thank you for your suggestions. The point is, I am not able to find any negative review of Berkeley's work, at least online. I am sure that there are some, though, and I will keep looking. Also - I will try to add some image, maybe a scan of an album cover. I am constantly expanding it, every time that there is some update anyway (the ATL group is yesterday's news - literally) and will keep doing so. Thank you very much! McMarcoP (talk) 10:25, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Yesterday you rated the Sharon Kay Penman article that I took from a stub. Today the rating was changed to a C because of the skimpy lead. I've reworked the lead. If you get a chance, do you mind swinging by and having a look? Thanks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 22:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the very speedy reaction and the extra set of eyes to fix the mistakes. I'm fairly certain it is Richard the Lionheart but will spend some time verifying. Thanks again. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:42, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks so much for taking the time to assess the Arius article; I appreciate your imput on it. Just out of curiosity, what kept it from gaining a "B" classification? I've been working trying to improve it of late, and would appreciate hearing your thoughts. Thanks again! - Ecjmartin (talk) 00:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback! I'm going to see what I can do about that, and then maybe nominate it for GA, once we resolve a couple of issues brought up recently by another editor. Thanks again for your imput! - Ecjmartin (talk) 01:15, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

I wanted to say thanks for always assessing bio articles when they are requested – you help out much more than I do, so:

Hekerui (talk) has given you a WikiCake! WikiCakes promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cake, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!

Spread the tastiness of cakes by adding {{subst:GiveCake}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

KimChee (talk) has baked you even more WikiCakes! WikiCakes promote WikiLove and hopefully these have made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cake, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!

Spread the tastiness of cakes by adding {{subst:GiveCake}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I noticed this too and second the motion. KimChee (talk) 00:41, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the recent assessments of Anthony Ashley-Cooper, 10th Earl of Shaftesbury and Elaine Hamilton-O'Neal. I appreciate the work that you are doing. For my future reference, could you direct me to the MOS regarding image sizing and formatting of references or citations in articles? I'm finding a bit of inconsistency between individuals assessing articles. I would really like to improve my editing and alignment with the MOS. Could you also provide a link that will let me know how to format the references in the manner that you revised? I haven't the foggiest idea how to do that and I cringe to think that I added work on your part. Any information you could provide that would improve the article is greatly appreciated. Thanks again! ;) Cindamuse (talk) 16:51, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback on the assessments of Anthony Ashley-Cooper and Elaine Hamilton-O'Neal at my talk page. Images, refs, what not. I'm definitely going to start using the reflinks bot for citations. I agree with the assessments. Although, I didn't expect the B assessment on AAC. I guess it was better than I thought. I had the biggest trouble finding any photos of Hamilton or her work that I could use. Doesn't lend much to an interesting article of an artist, in my opinion, but I did what I could. Thanks again. I appreciate the work that you are doing. Cindamuse (talk) 17:50, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Tpbradbury has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
so I've officially declared today as Tpbradbury's Day!
For being a great person and awesome Wikipedian,
enjoy being the star of the day, Tpbradbury!

Hi Tom, thanks for taking the time to assess Tim Christensen and Dizzy Mizz Lizzy, and making a few useful improvements. I'm happy Wikipedia has such good volunteers like yourself! Best wishes, Eddyspeeder (talk) 21:45, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

And obviously, it's about time you got another cake! Eddyspeeder (talk) 21:48, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Eddyspeeder (talk) has given you a WikiCake! WikiCakes promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cake, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!

Spread the tastiness of cakes by adding {{subst:GiveCake}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks a bunch for rating the article Archpoet and making most-welcome fixes! If you have some time, I'd love to hear your thoughts and suggestions on how to make it even better. I really want it to reach B, A, and even GA status soon enough, so any help would be greatly appreciated. Cheers!
• H☼ωdΘesI†fl∉∈{KLAT} • 09:26, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Danke schön for the suggestions. I'll get working a little harder!
• H☼ωdΘesI†fl∉∈{KLAT} • 18:13, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Dear Tom, Frania de Lutèce, who can't stand whisky but adores champagne, would like to know what exactly you mean by the sources needed for the image Napoléon adieux à la garde impériale à Fontainebleau.[1]

--Frania W. (talk) 18:48, 15 January 2011 (UTC) has bought you a whisky! Sharing a whisky is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a whisky, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Enjoy!

For following behind us amateurs and giving Wikipedia a polished look with good-looking footnotes, I award you this Citation Barnstar. HuskyHuskie (talk) 04:23, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

I want you to know how much I appreciate edits like this. I don't understand how to do that sort of stuff, and I don't have any interest in learning how, either, but I sure am glad there's people like you who add the professional look to this encyclopedia. Thank you! HuskyHuskie (talk) 04:23, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

This user's request to have autoblock on his/her IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

This should be fixed, but please post if again if it is not. TNXMan 14:40, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Are you sure you haven't made some sort of mistake? I can find no evidence that the autoblock you specify exists. Also, Hectorthebat's block dates from 11 March, and autoblocks normally last only for 24 hours. Try editing again. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:41, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

i've tried editing two different articles again and i've got the same error message Tom B (talk) 14:58, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello! I have reviewed this article; you can see the review at Talk:Ludwig Wittgenstein/GA1. Please don't be offended that I closed the review without allowing time for improvements - I only did that because, once improvements are made, I would like to redo the review from scratch in order to make sure that this excellent article gets all the attention it deserves. Thank you for working on it, and happy editing! --Cerebellum (talk) 11:42, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Wow, good job! Thank you for your prompt response. I still think it would be nice to have a "Reception" or "Legacy" section though - what do you think? --Cerebellum (talk) 09:09, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

Just to drop you a quick note of thanks for clearing up my ref error on the hawking page, I was interrupted at home and didn't realised the mistake - blushing now... Failedwizard (talk) 20:45, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

hv bn noticed @ Yahoo News: LINK (in a bar graph showing the monikers of the users with the most edits during the U.S. Pres. Primaries so far to the Wiki blp pertaining to a Republican party candidate).--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 10:25, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Tpbradbury, just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled right to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! —Tom Morris (talk) 12:30, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll take the running man for it; after all, it was what Sagan did on stage 3 at the race...although that seems so long ago now. Haha. But many thanks! Craig(talk) 23:00, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Absolutely; he is nearly there...but it isn't over until that final lap in Paris. One little incident like the one on stage 6...on a straight bit of road...and then they could be on the back foot. Flat tyres in the time trial...and let's not mention any more tacks...but for team performances, Sky have absolutely nailed it, despite losing Sivtsov early on...one less hand in the mountains but they've blown the rest of the field out of France. No wonder that they have 34 victories, excluding national championships, this season. Dominance. Craig(talk) 23:40, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for helping to make MMA articles on wikipedia better! In September 168 people made a total of 956 edits to MMA articles. I noticed you haven't listed yourself on the WikiProject Mixed martial artsParticipants page. Take a look, sign up, and don't forget to say hi on the talk page.

Please accept a belated thank you for the well wishes upon my retirement as FAC delegate, and apologies for the false alarm of my first—and hopefully last—retirement; the well wishes extended me were most kind, but I decided to return, re-committed, when another blocked sock was revealed as one of the factors aggravating the FA pages this year.

thx for your message. you can see harry reid and dick durbin are combined in one frame. however for the house of rep pictures, there was space to the right of the individual images rather than them being in pairs, the frames didn't seem to resize automatically Tom B (talk) 17:31, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

For your contributions to bring Napoleon (estimated annual readership: 2,777,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers. -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:13, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Wikipedia:Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:

If I've made any error in this listing, please don't hesitate to correct it; if for any reason you don't feel you deserve it, please don't hesitate to remove it; if you know of any other editor who merits one of these awards, please don't hesitate to give it; if you yourself deserve another award from any of the three tiers, please don't hesitate to take it! -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:13, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi! I've seen you around on The Beatles' articles... Would you consider becoming a member of WikiProject The Beatles, a WikiProject which aims to expand and improve coverage of The Beatles on Wikipedia? Please feel free to join us.

Other :Project: Add {{WikiProject The Beatles}} to the talk pages of all Beatles-related articles. Send a newsletter to members, canvas for new members and coordinate tasks. Enter articles assessed as stubs onto this list, also list articles needing cleanup and other work here.

If you complete one of these tasks, please remove it from the list and add your achievement to the project log.

Hi, in response to your thanks your welcome. I'd also like to add that I can't wait to see your excellent and well-appreciated work used on Beatles articles. All the best wishes and kind regards Joe Vitale 5 (talk) 08:59, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Hey Tpbradbury, I was wondering if you'd be able to help me promote "Alexander O'Neal" to at least GA, I've created like four or five articles for his albums some minor work on his actual page etc. and I was wondering if you'd like to help. Joe Vitale 5 (talk) 20:59, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi there. I just wanted to leave a note that we don't use alphabetical order in film categories. Instead, we use a system described in WP:FILMCAT so that people can easily see the most important ones first. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:49, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello I read one of your edits on Napoleon Bonaparte that convinced me that the article is to big and that it should be around 10,000 words not 17,000. I feel specially the battles are to much mentioned in details. Today I removed a lot of unnecessary repetitive information's only to see myself revert by one editor. I opened a debate on the talk page and I believe your input could be very important. I believe in consensus and collaboration and didn't want to make further changes until this issue is debated and decided by many editors.Thank you.Aubmn (talk) 22:19, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

I'd also be grateful if you could help with the article, Tom Bailey. Once again, thanking you in advance Joe Vitale 5 (talk) 21:50, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't usually ask you to help with football biographies but could you please help me with the article, David Lucas. Joe Vitale 5 (talk) 11:21, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

I hate to feel that I'm asking for too much, while giving so little (though I am). However, could you please give your undivided attention to the article, The Style Council. All the best, for being the best Joe Vitale 5 (talk) 18:27, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

A lot more than a little help with the article Rochdale would sure be appreciated partner. Joe Vitale 5 (talk) 18:10, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

You know that you deserve this... So take it!. And with it know that someone out there, like myself, really do appreciate your fine edits. 'Stay Up' & Keep Rocking. Joe Vitale 5 (talk) 08:05, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

You are receiving this message because a technical change may affect a bot, gadget, or user script you have been using. The breaking change involves API calls. This change has been planned for two years. The WMF will start making this change on 30 June 2015. A partial list of affected bots can be seen here: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2015-June/081931.html This includes all bots that are using pywikibot compat. Some of these bots have already been fixed. However, if you write user scripts or operate a bot that uses the API, then you should check your code, to make sure that it will not break.

What, exactly, is breaking? The "default continuation mode" for action=query requests to api.php will be changing to be easier for new coders to use correctly. To find out whether your script or bot may be affected, then search the source code (including any frameworks or libraries) for the string "query-continue". If that is not present, then the script or bot is not affected. In a few cases, the code will be present but not used. In that case, the script or bot will continue working.

This change will be part of 1.26wmf12. It will be deployed to test wikis (including mediawiki.org) on 30 June, to non-Wikipedias (such as Wiktionary) on 1 July, and to all Wikipedias on 2 July 2015.

Are you using someone else's gadgets or user scripts? Most scripts are not affected. To find out if a script you use needs to be updated, then post a note at the discussion page for the gadget or the talk page of the user who originally made the script. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:04, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

If you make changes to a page as you did here then please do not alter things that affect an established style by inserting spaces into section headers when the majority of headers did not contain them.

Please do not alter the start of citation templates such as {{Cite Nuttall}} to {{cite Nuttall}} when the citation templates before and after it start with capital letters.

In the case of an article title such as London Gazette Extraordinary please do not change it to London Gazette Extraordinary it was done like that for stylistic reasons. Likewise unlike with a "s" at the end of a link which appears a blue "'s" does not so [[Hugh Halkett|Hugh Halkett's]] and [[Hugh Halkett]]'s appear differently "Hugh Halkett's" "Hugh Halkett's" and I think that the "apostrophe s" looks better in blue. -- PBS (talk) 17:47, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi there Tpbradbury! I'm looking for editors to help me improve the article for the AIFMD European financial directive. I saw you had recently edited the homepage for WP:ECON, and noticed you had economics listed on your user page. I thought I'd reach out to you, since this article might be of interest to you. I'm looking at this page as a consultant for the Managed Funds Association; due to my financial COI, I won't be making edits to the article directly, and I'd instead like to discuss my proposed changes with interested editors. Could you take a look at the latest draft I've put together? You can read it and tell me what you think here. Thanks! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 15:17, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!